Google AdSense Forum

1. I have a site about remote control cars and other rc toys. I consider the site to be a content site but have been rejected twice now by AdSense. I have a link to my site in my profile if anyone please could take a look and give their opinion on what im doing wrong.

Note that the banners and affiliate links have been added AFTER the first rejection because i thought that a more commercial look might help. Apparently it did'nt.

2. Does anyone know if its bad applying too many times? Is my third time getting too much?

Blue_fin, I sticky-mailed you my url. It seems that i cant show my url in the profile as a non-full member..

jonknee, The rejection Google sent was the standard one i think most get: "After reviewing your application, our specialists have found that the website currently associated with your account does not meet our program criteria." etc etc.. There are sites very much like mine that has AdSense so they market shouldn't be a problem.

I have seen sites without a private policy getting acceptet. I.e. one site with Google AdSense that has adds about rc cars, rc helicopters etc. Exactly my field actually, and that site doesn't have any private policy.

Yes, maybe you have a point there loanuniverse. The only thing i'm afraid of is to "spam" them with applications or what they think is moaning qustions. And then end up being blocked for further attempts because of that.

Has anyone tried being acceptet after 3rd or more tries or is the race over at that point?

A wild guess here, but has anyone applied using a site without a privacy policy and gotten accepted?

Yes. The site primarily offers shareware font downloads and sells a "shareware and extras" product based on the download materials. No content besides the download pages and the paypal sales page for the package deal.

The only people who can really tell you why your specific site was rejected would be the folks at Google who rejected it. Ask them why.

I tried asking them what was wrong and just got some standard mail that "site doesn't comply with bla bla bla". Basically nothing related to my site in specifik. Yes, maybe i should wait a while and build my site - only problem being that I dont know what to "build towards" to get in. Im getting obsessed here i think :¦

So no-one can see any particular reason that it is being rejected? Something I didn't notice?

We do not permit AdWords ads to be published on web pages that also contain what could be considered competing ads. This would include all content-targeted ads as well as text-based ads. Text-based ads, for this situation, can be loosely defined as ads that mimic AdWords ads or appear to be associated with AdWords ads on your site. We do allow affiliate or limited-text links.

You've got some BIG CJ text ads, not just the little one liners. Might I direct your attention to the nitro cars page as a good example? I think you are falling foul of this line :

>> This would include all content-targeted ads as well as text-based ads.

If you switched to all one line text ads, they might let it slide

>> We do allow affiliate or limited-text links.

ie the banners are OK, and so should the one-liners be. 3 or 4 lines of ad copy is definitely a text-based ad in my book...

Yes, ok I see your points, TallTroll and devlin, about the "current deal adds". Ill remove them and hope that'll help for my next try. The thing is though that I didn't have any kind of advertisement the first time i applied and got rejected so it probably isn't to do with that..

Looks like an online catalogue of rc toys? Hmmm yes ok, maybe. I assume more content would help then..

rcmartin, please don't take this the wrong way but if you're looking to cover all your bases for your next attempt at getting into AdSense, you may want to look at the spelling/grammar on the main page (and perhaps the rest of the site for good measure). There's a spelling mistake on line 3 and a double-negative on line 6. That's as far as I read, so perhaps a Google reviewer wouldn't go much further?

Google stated in my rejection letter that sites need to be 'up to standard' (amongst other things) so perhaps that's another area to look at. Not a criticism, just an observation.

Damn, i just rewrote the index yesterday and i dint have time to go over it..couldnt be bothered :) So 2oddSox, u are absolute right. Its needs a revision - probably a big one! This wasn't the text that Google got though...wouldn't dare that! I diffenitely think your right that things needs to be up to standard when submitting.

I'm now on my sixth application. I may have started gettin a bit lengthy, and perhaps, if this doesn't work, will try the good old "I have now rectified all the issues you had with my site and am now in full compliance with your requirements" or some such thing.

Do you know if the same people handle one site, or does a pool of reviewrs mix up which sites they review?

Yes, i wondered about that too. And also if the prior applications matter or they take it up as a new application each time..

killroy, as you are on your sixth application it would be very nice to hear how your next one(s) go, and expecially if you get acceptet at some point. So if anything happens with your site and AdSense, a post in this thread would be greatly appreciated!

Indeed it will. I will try to document my experiences. Originally the site was very plain, basically good markup structure but no style. In subsequent applications I added styling, a consistent colour scheme, logo artwork. All to make the site seem more mainstream to the AdSense investigators. I've also tracked what pages they look at (only root for the first rejection, more in a later iteration).

Now, most recently I've adde postal contact information.

I'm also wondering if they consider PR and pages indexed, as I have the problem that google does not list all the pages it spiders (see: [webmasterworld.com...] Problem is that I believe googles backlink and PR updating is not working well. I have dozends of PR3+ backlinks and 100s of lower PR links, but hte toolbar shows no PR and google shows no backlinks (even though it found the page followign just such backlinks).

Other things I'm considering is navigation asd the site currently has no left hand navgation features, but relies on in-content links and a breadcrumb trail, which seesm well enough fo a content based information site, but perhaps hte AdSense investigators don't think so.

Watching their visits in my log, I'm also a bit concerned that these investigators are part timers hired quickly to handle the load of new submissions and are not neccessarily very well versed themselves. They might simply be ticking down a check list without spending much time considering the sites true merit.

The others are right about being up to standards. But it only has to happen the initial time. Meaning get rid of any other advertisements and look like you have content.

Once you get accepted it seems you can do whatever you want. I also have seen the Google ads mixed in with many other advertisements. I've also seen Google ads on many questionable sites such as warez sites.

I'm not sure why Google would care so much though. The whole idea of this program is that if someone is interested in what they are reading then they may click on the advertisement. Overture has really taken a stand by saying something like 'do you really want your ad to show on someone's blog?' when they were slamming Google.

Why not a blog? Someone reading a blog probably has purchased something in their lifetime and most likely will again.

It seems more of an attempt to do like Microsoft has done. Remember when Microsoft held manufacturers hostage by requiring them to install their browser only and not allow others or the manufacturer couldn't install the MS OS?

It is a horrible thing that Google can dictate the rules to such a degree that people will spend the time, energy and sometimes money to change their entire site just to have the privilege of sharing revenue from one entity.

It is a horrible thing that Google can dictate the rules to such a degree that people will spend the time, energy and sometimes money to change their entire site just to have the privilege of sharing revenue from one entity.

If some publishers choose to design their sites so they can participate in the AdSense network, how is that Google's fault?

As for the suggestion that Google is a monopoly that can "dictate the rules," that's simply untrue. AdSense isn't the only advertising game in town, and it certainly isn't the only potential source of revenue for Web sites. Other options include traditional ad networks, affiliate programs, and direct sales.

Yes, it is true that people can and do use others who don't impose the 'if you use us then you then you agree not use anyone else on the same page' rules. That to me is a dictatorship.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it's not a dictatorship but where is the fair competition in that? The creation of a monopoly usually starts by demanding no competition and people blindly following that demand until they realize too late what happened.

They also don't allow sharing of any statistics. What is there to hide?

They don't show the bid price so you have no idea what the click is actually worth so people just assume since it's Google they are getting a better price from say Overture or Sprinks.

As far a changing a site goes so they can participate I suppose there is nothing wrong with it except that people lose their identity to conform to someone else's idea of what a website should look like.

rcmartin, your site looks very nice. I think you're right to be concerned about applying too many times. Since you don't have PageRank yet, waiting until you do, and working on developing the site, would be smart. Not sure how to develop? Read Google's tips to webmasters every night before you go to sleep. ;-)

killroy, Google lists maybe one quarter of the pages it has indexed, but that's the same for everybody, not really a factor to consider. I noticed that you mention Google three times on your index page--I'm sure they hate that. And all those statistics--yikes! Meaningful only to other webmasters. You should use that space to clearly explain what you do.

Yes, it is true that people can and do use others who don't impose the 'if you use us then you then you agree not use anyone else on the same page' rules. That to me is a dictatorship.

Your definition of "dictatorship" is different from the dictionary definition, but never mind that: A more important point is your misrepresentation of Google's terms of service. Google doesn't say you can't "use anyone else on the same page." You can run banners from ad networks like Burst and FastClick, you can use affiliate links, or you can sell products yourself.

Or, if you can prefer, you can bail out of AdSense and run all the competing text ads that you want to (assuming that the other text-ad networks don't mind sharing your page with each other).

There seems to be a general theme here which I find disturbing, implying exclusivity is a bad thing. Many of the other advertisers are exclusive, others offer varying degrees of return based on exclusivity.

The fact that google does not want their revenues discussed is good business sense nothing else. Google is a business not a public charity and as such can post whatever terms to use the service they want. If you don't like the terms...turn in your adsense hat....and move onto the "greener" pastures. No different than any other business decision we make every day. The discussion that google owes us anything else besides what is contained in the TOS and FAQ makes no sense at all. Any other business agreement reads similiar, if not more restrictive.

This "google owes me something" trend amazes me. They are a business, a succesful one I hope, as I have partnered with them in this venture. If it doesn't work out, then so be it...there will be others.